The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - research data on LEO shootings

bdc · July 13, 2005, 05:10 PM

Philosophical reflections.

In the Army, we were trained to shoot specific positions at specific ranges on specific sized targets. The emphasis was not on reactive shooting, shooting at unknown ranges, shooting in low light, shooting on the walk, shooting on the run. Of course, our Captain had 14 better shooters don the uniform shirts of our poorer shooters and have them shoot requalification.

How is it in police training today? Is a police officer trained to shoot on the walk, shoot on the run, shoot in low light, cover 360 degrees and reactive shoot? Or is it at the level of shooting for score at known distances with a given course of fire? Well, I think you know the answer. So when the officer has to shoot on the run, the walk, cover 360 degrees and within low light, you shouldn't be surprised at th low hit ratio.

Philosophically, I don't understand the concern about what percentage of unarmed perps are shot. That's right guys. How many ordinary, honest citizens without rap sheets are actually gunned down each year because of a "furtive movement". Darned few! I don't say that the police should shoot JUST because someone runs away or the police should shoot JUST because some one is coming at them and declines to halt when ordered to do so. I simply ask you how many times does a squared away John ignore police commands? That is a tipoff that a policeman is facing problems.

Two Georgia Highway Patrolmen engaged an armed BG who advanced on them from 12 feet. Altogether, the policemen registered only 39 hits out of well over 60 rounds that they fired. The BG died at their feet. I looked at the autopsy pictures. Only about 1/3 of the hits would have eventually proved fatal.

Conversely, I saw on multiple occassions an instructor with just a few hours training do the following with fat, out-of-shape middle aged housewives. He put a target 12 feet away, the pistol on a piece of cardboard on the ground. On command, the woman would pick up the magazine, insert the magazine, shoot for the base of the throat as rapidly as possible. Then, when empty, put the pistol down on th cardboard, magazine removed. Then run with the empty magazine to a picnic bench 50 feet away to pick up a fresh magazine, run back to the gun, and start the process all over. This was done until the woman would have shot 50 rounds. Never a miss - same adrenaline - distance was futher than all the rounds fired by the highway patrol. quickshoot.com and turnipseedtechnique.com

At the bottom line, it is technique, not gun selection, not ammunition selection, not magazine capacity that makes the difference.

July 13, 2005, 05:10 PM	#11
bdc Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Posts: 60	Questions Philosophical reflections. In the Army, we were trained to shoot specific positions at specific ranges on specific sized targets. The emphasis was not on reactive shooting, shooting at unknown ranges, shooting in low light, shooting on the walk, shooting on the run. Of course, our Captain had 14 better shooters don the uniform shirts of our poorer shooters and have them shoot requalification. How is it in police training today? Is a police officer trained to shoot on the walk, shoot on the run, shoot in low light, cover 360 degrees and reactive shoot? Or is it at the level of shooting for score at known distances with a given course of fire? Well, I think you know the answer. So when the officer has to shoot on the run, the walk, cover 360 degrees and within low light, you shouldn't be surprised at th low hit ratio. Philosophically, I don't understand the concern about what percentage of unarmed perps are shot. That's right guys. How many ordinary, honest citizens without rap sheets are actually gunned down each year because of a "furtive movement". Darned few! I don't say that the police should shoot JUST because someone runs away or the police should shoot JUST because some one is coming at them and declines to halt when ordered to do so. I simply ask you how many times does a squared away John ignore police commands? That is a tipoff that a policeman is facing problems. Two Georgia Highway Patrolmen engaged an armed BG who advanced on them from 12 feet. Altogether, the policemen registered only 39 hits out of well over 60 rounds that they fired. The BG died at their feet. I looked at the autopsy pictures. Only about 1/3 of the hits would have eventually proved fatal. Conversely, I saw on multiple occassions an instructor with just a few hours training do the following with fat, out-of-shape middle aged housewives. He put a target 12 feet away, the pistol on a piece of cardboard on the ground. On command, the woman would pick up the magazine, insert the magazine, shoot for the base of the throat as rapidly as possible. Then, when empty, put the pistol down on th cardboard, magazine removed. Then run with the empty magazine to a picnic bench 50 feet away to pick up a fresh magazine, run back to the gun, and start the process all over. This was done until the woman would have shot 50 rounds. Never a miss - same adrenaline - distance was futher than all the rounds fired by the highway patrol. quickshoot.com and turnipseedtechnique.com At the bottom line, it is technique, not gun selection, not ammunition selection, not magazine capacity that makes the difference.